Finanzierung und finanzielle Probleme von Leistungen und Strukturen im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe im Jahr 2011 – allgemeine Aspekte und geburtshilfliche Versorgung

Imaging of lumpectomy surface with large field-of-view confocal laser scanning microscope for intraoperative margin assessment - POLARHIS study

INTRODUCTION

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in case of breast cancer and/or in-situ-carcinoma lesions (DCIS) intends to completely remove breast cancer while saving healthy tissue as much as possible to achieve better aesthetic and psychological outcomes for the patient. Such modality should result in postoperative tumor-free margins of the surgical resection in order to carry on with the next therapeutical steps of the patient care. However, 10-40% of patients undergo more than one procedure to achieve acceptable cancer-negative margins. A 2nd operation or further operation (re-operation) has physical, psychological, and economic consequences. It also delays the administration of adjuvant therapy, and has been associated with an elevated risk of local and distant disease relapse. In addition, a high re-operation rate can have significant economic effects - both for the service provider and for the payer. A more efficient intraoperative assessment of the margin may address these issues. Recently, a large field-of-view confocal laser scanning microscope designed to allow real-time intraoperative margin assessment has arrived on the market - the Histolog Scanner. In this paper, we present the first evaluation of lumpectomy margins assessment with this new device.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

40 consecutive patients undergoing BCS with invasive and/or DCIS were included. The whole surface of the surgical specimens was imaged right after the operation using the Histolog Scanner (HLS). The assessment of all the specimen margins was performed intraoperatively according to the standard-of-care of the center which consists of combined ultrasound (IOUS) and/or conventional specimen radiography (CSR), and gross surgical inspection. Margin assessment on HLS images was blindly performed after the surgery by 5 surgeons and one pathologist. The capabilities to correctly determine margin status in HLS images was compared to the final histopathological assessment. Furthermore, the potential reduction of positive-margin and re-operation rates by utilization of the HLS were extrapolated.

RESULTS

The study population included 7/40 patients with DCIS (17.5%), 17/40 patients with DCIS and invasive ductal cancer (IDC NST) (42.5%), 10/40 patients with IDC NST (25%), 4/40 with invasive lobular cancer (ILC) (10%), and 1/40 patients with a mix of IDC NST, DCIS, and ILC. Clinical routine resulted in 13 patients with positive margins identified by final histopathological assessment, resulting in 12 re-operations (30% re-operation rate). Amongst these 12 patients, 10 had DCIS components involved in their margin, confirming the importance of improving the detection accuracy of this specific lesion. Surgeons, who were given a short familiarization on HLS images, and a pathologist were able to detect positive margins in 4/12 and 7/12 patients (33% and 58%), respectively, that were missed by the intraoperative standard of care. In addition, a retrospective analysis of the HLS images revealed that cancer lesions can be identified in 9/12 (75%) patients with positive margins.

CONCLUSION

The present study presents that breast cancer can be detected by surgeons and pathologists in HLS images of lumpectomy margins leading to a potential reduction of 30% and 75% of the re-operations. The Histolog Scanner is easily inserted into the clinical workflow and has the potential to improve the intraoperative standard-of-care for the assessment of breast conserving treatments. In addition, it has the potential to increase oncological safety and cosmetics by avoiding subsequent resections and can also have a significant positive economic effect for service providers and cost bearers. The data presented in this study will have to be further confirmed in a prospective phase-III-trial.

Relevance of health economics in breast cancer treatment - the view of certified breast centres and their patients

Breast cancer centres - certified in accordance with the criteria of the German Cancer Association and the German Mastology Association - are established throughout Germany. Although the setting up of centres and the subsequent need for certification are associated with a marked increase in costs, initial data show positive effects on quality. Certified centres are cost-effective from the point of view of health economics - they lead to improved quality in processes and results without creating any increase in costs for the funding bodies. However, the organization of the necessary structures, with interdisciplinary treatment, documentation and quality-assurance measures, requires considerable resources. Increasing consolidation of inpatient services is also involved, while shortening of the patients' hospitalization periods is leading to reduced remuneration from the funding bodies. The current cost deficits, which have resulted from the increased resources required, need to be recouped through additional charges. It will only be possible to maintain the high quality achieved if additional charges become available to cover the centres' added costs. Good data are increasingly becoming available as a basis for negotiations on charges - e.g., with regard to the quality of results and the National Cancer Plan - as well as clear support from patients.

Relevance of health economics in breast cancer treatment: integration of economics in the management of breast cancer at the clinic level

Since the introduction of the diagnosis-related groups (DRG) system with cost-related and entity-specific flat-rate reimbursements for all in-patients in 2004 in Germany, economics have become an important focus in medical care, including breast centers. Since then, physicians and hospitals have had to gradually take on more and more financial responsibilities for their medical care to avoid losses for their institutions. Due to financial limitations of resources, most medical services have to be adjusted to correlating revenues, which results in the development of a variety of active measures to understand, steer, and optimize costs, resources and related processes for breast cancer treatment. In this review, the challenging task to implement microeconomic management at the clinic level for breast cancer treatment is analyzed from breast cancer-specific publications. The newly developed economic management perspective is identified for different stakeholders in the healthcare system, and successful microeconomic projects and future aspects are described.

Financing of certified centers: a willingness-to-pay analysis

INTRODUCTION

Although care in certified breast centers is now established throughout Germany, numerous services are still not being reimbursed. This also affects other centers involved in the specialty of gynecology such as gynecological cancer centers, perinatal centers, and endometriosis centers. Although a certified center is entitled to charge additional fees, these are in most cases not reimbursed. Calculation of additional costs is limited by the fact that data from the Institute for the Hospital Reimbursement System (Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus, InEK) do not reflect interdisciplinary services and procedures. For decision-makers, society's willingness to pay is an important factor in guiding decisions on the basis of social priorities. A hypothetical maximum willingness to pay can be calculated using a willingness-to-pay analysis, making it possible to identify deficiencies in the arbitrary setting of health budgets at the macro-level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a multicenter study conducted between November 2009 and December 2010, 2,469 patients at a university hospital and at a non-university hospital were asked about the extent of their awareness of certified centers, the influence of centers on hospital presentation, and about personal attitudes toward quality-oriented reimbursement. A subjective assessment of possible additional charges was calculated using a willingness-to-pay analysis.

RESULTS

In the overall group, 53.4 % of the patients were aware of what a certified center is and 27.4 % had specific information (obstetrics 40.0/32.3 %; mastology 66.8/23.2 %; gynecological oncology 54.7/27.3 %; P < 0.001). For 43.8 %, a certified center was one reason or the major reason for presentation (obstetrics 26.2 %; mastology 66.8 %; gynecological oncology 46.6 %; P < 0.001). A total of 72.6 % were in favor of quality-oriented reimbursement and 69.7 % were in favor of an additional charge for a certified center amounting to €538.56 (mastology €643.65, obstetrics €474.67, gynecological oncology €532.47). In all, 33.9 % would accept an increase in health-insurance fees (averaging 0.3865 %), and 28.3 % were in favor of reduced remuneration for non-certified centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The existence of certified centers is being increasingly recognized by patients. Additional charges for certified centers are generally supported. There is therefore a clear demand for them-from patients as well. This may be useful when negotiations are being conducted.